Slashdot Mirror

But here's a list of other odd sports that exist.

Also, ESPN 8: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8414uArsBOs

...what percentage of French people are happy, or even care, about this. Or is this just another of the strange things that get to happen in today's world?

Who knows. But here's a list of other odd sports that exist.

40 unbroken, consecutive, full-range (chest touches the floor) pushups is really a fairly high bar athletically, probably on the order of top ~1% of the total population

The study indicates this corresponds to the top ~10% of firefighters, a group who on a whole are already known to be in vastly better shape than most of the population. This corresponds with my own anecdotal observations -- at my local crossfit gym, we test for max pushups once a year or so, mostly for fun. 40+ unbroken pushups easily corresponds to the top ~5% of that self-selected high fitness crowd as well.

I don't think it's that exclusive. Though variations on technique do matter a lot, your crossfit group might use an unusually difficult variant.

According to a 39 year old who does 40 push ups is just on the border of excellent. And the US Marine Fitness standards don't even go below 67. And despite the reputation the standards aren't that demanding, any reasonably fit guy in the 20-40 age range can probably get well under the minimum of 3 miles in 25 minutes with a little training so I suspect the push up standards aren't that much harder.

Really I think most "fit" guys can probably hit 40, at least with a little training. I think it is a decent cardiovascular marker because while you need strength it's actually a fairly significant aerobic draw. I hadn't done any upper body for years but I could hit >40 on my first go, probably because I'm a runner so I was able to keep the muscles supplied with blood. It's after 40 that I hit a wall based on arm strength, but up till then it was largely aerobic.

In fact, it's 10,507 by Minoru Yoshida of Japan in October 1980. After which they stopped keeping track of that record.

So maybe you should start out with an analogy that isn't demonstrably false...

Really the "winningest" huh? You mean they are the country that has won the most medals? I'm sorry that is Russia with the top medal tally. They had the most medals in 1956,1960,1964,1972,1976,1980,and 1994. Where as Norway is actually second but most were won a long time ago: 1924, 1928, 1936, 1952, 1968, and 2002 being the newest first place win. So no not the "winningest" in a long time, better than the US in the Winter Olympics yes, but of course Russia kicks every countries ass because they live in the cold all the time, and this year they have home advantage. Oh and my information comes from here: http://www.topendsports.com/ev...

What the hell is the broad jump?

Standing Long Jump

That guy passed out on the floor of the burning house doesn't care that because you're female, you can't meet the weight-lifting requirements of the firefighter exam. He just cares whether you get him out.

Relax, the guy passed out on the floor of the burning building will be saved! All firefighters have to pass fitness and strength testing. http://www.topendsports.com/testing/forces-fire-fighters.htm

What you seem to be saying is that ALL women should be excluded from firefighting just because MOST women couldn't pass the entry exams. Most men couldn't pass the exams either.

Sure, given the natural differences between the average man and woman, men will always outnumber women in jobs needing strength.

But you shouldn't apply infomation about the average man or women to every man or women. It's unfair and discriminatory

Just to note, I'm hardly an average driver. I drove daily for work(Sales/marketing) for about 10 years before I settled down local. In the last 15 years I've driven roughly 750,000. Most people don't do that in even 45 years.

Also, think about it. A 2 second light on a 4 lane road which is equivalent to what, 30mph. Minimum it'll take .2 to .5 seconds for the light to change, then, an average driver .3 seconds to proccess a response to a light change even if thier foot was already on the brake to begin with if not add another half second for moving foot and apply brake. Then, going from 30-0mph in 1-1.5 seconds is hardly a normal stop for any driver. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a 2 second light for up to 15mph, and 3.5 seconds for up to 40mph then 5 seconds at 50 and above? If you did that then you'd have very few issues? Plus, the cameras wouldn't generate any major revenue.

Typically lights are set this way. I can tell you from my driving experience that Typical downtown areas and streets have 3.5 second yellow lights even on two lane roads. Why should a city have anything less? Wouldn't it be safer to give them a consistent timing across all cities? Even the time it takes for lights to change from one direction to the other is 3 seconds. That timing is there for a reason. To make roads safer and prevent accidents.

Also, you call and imply that .2 seconds is a blatant red light. I've seen some blatant red lights in my time and .2 seconds is hardly what I or most officers would call a red light running. Actually if you were smart you'd know that it's less time than it takes for a light to turn from yellow to red. Try going drag racing at the track some time and you'll understand what I mean. Actually, if you are curious, you can test your own reaction timing on the link at the end of my post to see what I'm saying(Try doing it while being relaxed). The typical person reacts around .2 to .35 seconds in thier ready for it prime condition. Distracted in the slightest they'd likely react around .4 to .5. If you are a road engineer you adjust for the higher end because its a safer bet. It's like designing a building in an area that gets hurricanes typically only up to 110mph but every once in a while it goes up to 140mph. Which wind speed are you going to design it for?

Stop thinking of drivers as cattle in a box. Think of them as people.. They have emotions, they are flexible, they get tired, they get happy, they notice things on the side of the road and are quite frequently slightly distracted at any given moment. They are not automatons nor should they be.

If you want to test your own reaction time, http://www.topendsports.com/testing/reactiontest.htm
Mine is .23 when I'm waiting for it. .42 when I'm just relaxed.

So, next time you say a 2 second light is more than enough time to prepare and stop. Think about going from 30-0 in about 1 second. Because thats about the time you have with a 2 second yellow light. Imagine if there were ice/snow on the ground. I garruantee you wouldn't be able to stop.